SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
MAM RAJ AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS – Respondent


IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP No. 15986 of 2013

Date of Decision : 27.11.2013

Mam Raj & others

.......... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana & others

...... Respondents

*****

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present :

Mr.Ramesh Hooda, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana.

****

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

SURYA KANT

, J. (Oral)

The petitioners impugn the notifications dated 11.09.2012 and

27.11.2012 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in respect of acquisition of their land

measuring 16 Kanal-4 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of village

Gurawar, District Jhajjar, which has been acquired to construct the Water

Works for a group of three villages under the Water Supply Scheme of

Jhajjar Town.

2.

The principal contention of the petitioners is that close to their

acquired land, there lies a huge chunk of Gram Panchayat land of village

Jondhi, who has passe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top